InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 179
Posts 35717
Boards Moderated 19
Alias Born 04/17/2013

Re: janice shell post# 98614

Thursday, 11/05/2015 8:56:58 PM

Thursday, November 05, 2015 8:56:58 PM

Post# of 223884
"But of course everything would depend on whether anyone got that in writing."

Sorry, even if they have it in writing, I don't see how a client of TDA would have a winning claim.

I'm very open to others floating their theory of how TDA clients would assert a legal claim to an illegal dividend, regardless of whatever TDA told them in writing or otherwise.

The only legal theory I personally can see in CRGP is equitable estoppel (based on detrimental reliance). And without going into a great deal of great detail (sic), I do nott foresee any court finding that these circumstances are sufficiently egregious (nor have other elements of unfairness and contractual and/or tortious obligation) for a court to apply equitable estoppel.

If folks have OTHER theories of how a client would have a potentially winning claim against TDA for the illegal dividend distribution, I'm all ears and eyes to learn those theories.

I can't see that detrimental reliance (equitable estoppel) would be a winner for clients wishing to keep their unjust enrichment, regardless of what TDA represented to them - especially, but nott limited to, the disclaimers in the TDA account agreement those clients signed.
Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.